UK Tomb Raider PR firm called out for "trying to fix Metacritic scores," issues statement in reply |
This story first broke last Wednesday when a UK journalist wrote on his twitter account that EidosÂ’ British PR firm Barrington Harvey sought to prevent any review lower than 8.0/10 for Tomb Raider: Underworld (PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii, DS, PC, PS2) from getting published until three days after the game has launched.When asked about this, a rep from Barrington Harvey explained,
ThatÂ’s right. WeÂ’re trying to manage the review scores at the request of Eidos. Just that weÂ’re trying to get the Metacritic rating to be high, and the brand manager in the US thatÂ’s handling all of Tomb Raider has asked that we just manage the scores before the game is out, really, just to ensure that we donÂ’t put people off buying the game, basically.
Bad move, old boy.
Of course, the general reaction wasn't a favorable one when people heard about it. Journalists and gamers alike went up in arms and scathing criticisms about "unethical" behavior filled the net in the interim. I think Kotaku phrased it best when they asked, "What the holy hell?"
Enter Barrington and Harvey's damage control: Simon Byron, one of Barrington Harvey's directors, issued an official statement on the matter saying,
Barrington Harvey is not in the position of telling reviewers what they can and cannot say. We love Tomb Raider and believe it merits a score of at least 8/10, but if someone disagrees thatÂ’s entirely their prerogative. No problem at all. Seriously: no problem.
Our original NDA stated that in order to receive an advance copy of the game, reviewers agreed not to post reviews ahead of 5:00pm, Wednesday 19th November 2008. Nothing else. No further obligations whatsoever.
I do agree that it's perfectly reasonable to hold reviewers to schedules posited in a non-disclosure agreement but they really should have prevented *all* reviews from seeing the light of day and not just the ones below 8.0.
Game reviewers are under pressure to release their findings quickly and ahead of the competition. That's sort of why they look for advanced copies in the first place. Telling them they can *only* publish their reviews early if they publish it with a high score is no different than offering them cash make bogus reviews.
... but that's only my opinion. Feel free to share yours in the comments below. I'd love to hear what you think.
The full version of Barrington Harvey's statement can be viewed in the source link below.
Related Tomb Raider Underworld Articles:
- Video: Tomb Raider Underword: Hot Lara-on-Bike action
- Tomb Raider: Underworld Dangerous gameplay video
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
disgusting.
why don't you just make a great game so that you don't have to worry about scores or securing consumer money. eeewww..
I would give the game a 8.0, and I couldn't stand the Tomb Raider games before this one.
just for that this game gets a 7.9 from me, I've never played it and don't care to but it gets a 7.9 >:(
Now everyone knows about this and they just look pathetic.
And by doing this it makes it seem like the game is even worse even if it might not be a bad game.
the worst part of this is that TRU is a pretty good game, but this is absolutely disgusting
nobody should be reviewing the games before they come out,apart from journos who actually get to play the games before coming out!
look at GOW2's metacritic outcome and LBP!! they were ruined by immature kiddies who decided because they didn't own a particular console, they were going to give it a crap score?
think metacritic scores should be fixed so that the game gets scored after the release and not before!
and now i wait to be pwned!! lol!!
this has been happening before and has happened with major games that we all know and love. im sure that certain gaming websites have has similar propositions made and accepted them. This just so happened to come to light but just think of the countless games that did not. if a site has no governing body that can be controlled directly then it has to be regulated...soon we wont know who to trust for that quick nudge on buying a game on launch or waiting for the price to drop.
I actually used to work for a game publisher in a former life. This kind of thing certainly does happen, though just how often, I can't say.